So What Was All The Fuss About? Marvel Locks In Jon Favreau For 'Iron Man 2'

EXCLUSIVE: It’s not officially announced yet, but I’m told that Marvel Studios and Iron Man director Jon Favreau have reached a deal for him to helm the sequel, due out in 2010. (Robert Downey Jr had a sequel clause in his contract so he’s on board.) Marvel Studios boss David Maisel was quick to put out a “definitely” richer offer to Favreau, but not quick enough for Jon — who used the Internet and other media to rile up the movie’s many fans who spread nonsense that Marvel was dragging its feet and then lowballing him. Granted Maisel is no day at the beach himself, but couldn’t Favreau have refrained from negotiating in public and left the bargaining to his powerful agency CAA? (FYI, I earlier posted that he acted like an asshole, but he’s not…)

57 Comments

I cut him some slack. I figure it this way. He *wanted* to do IM2 like mad. He *wanted* Marvel to lock him in ASAP. Otherwise those eejits across the street would have tempted him with a fat offer to direct Hancock 2. That would have been Death Of Career!

40yearoldstitzer • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

I was following Favreau’s comments and didn’t take him to be an asshole at all. His concern was pretty straight forward: he didn’t think a decent movie could be rushed to theaters in 2 years, and an offer worth rushing for wasn’t immediately on the table.

Favreau had every right to be hesitant. Look at Sam Raimi and Gore Verbinski. They rushed their Spiderman and Pirates sequels, and look how horrible those turned out to be. ESPECIALLY Spiderman 3, which might be one of the worst films of the decade.

jake • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

I disagree that he Favreau was being an asshole. I think it just was utterly disrespectful that they announce an Iron Man 2 without even asking or consulting or sealing a deal with Favreau. Say what you will be the movie has made 310 million and to say that Favreau was not part of the reason for the success is crazy.

#44 • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

Of course John had something to do with Iron Mans success, unlike Robert Downie Jr. …………. I’m sure he just stood on his tape mark

Nikki, I agree with you a lot of the time, but you’re way off base on this one. He wasn’t being an asshole. The way talent can be treated by a studio, any studio, Favreau was being very smart. Good for him.

Not Favreau's Fan • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

Favreau and Vince Vaughn can both be struck by giant bolts of lightning and toasted into ash for all I care, they’re both a couple of slime balls and no friend to working writers.

Crystal Diane Stevens • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

>>His concern was pretty straight forward: he didn’t think a decent movie could be rushed to theaters in 2 years, and an offer worth rushing for wasn’t immediately on the table.<<

Yet he changes his mind when an offer lands on his table. Can anyone say “whore”? Let’s face it, the only reason he’s doing special effects movies these days is because he was a one hit wonder with Swingers. This whole thing reminds me of James Marsden who wept to the press that he hadn’t been offered a part in the X-Men sequels about a week before it was announced he was in the movie. Nobody likes a cryababy bitch.

heypal • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

Who’s the studio mouthpiece now, Nikki? You’ve greatly exaggerated Favreau’s use of the internet here. All I remember him doing is posting one thing on his MySpace page saying that he hadn’t heard from Marvel, yet.

I don’t know where your vitriol comes from, but Favreau is definitely not wrong to want to be a part of a franchise that he helped to create. The fact that Marvel gave every sign of moving forward without him and was not, as you claim, “quick to put out a ‘definitely’ richer offer” would give anyone in his shoes pause.

Marvel is cheap, and that is scary to the people who are dedicating years of their lives to generating hundreds of millions of dollars for them. How cheap? Go to one of their premieres and you’ll see exactly what I mean. I didn’t eat for fear of food poisoning, security was nonexistent, and the iron man party’s decorations consisted of scrap metal.

Matt • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

I don’t think anyone is doubting Downey’s contribution, #44. Just read any review.

Jake was simply saying Favreau was “part of the reason for the success,” and I totally agree.

You know, some may say that Favreau acted like an asshole, but I think he was just speaking in a language that studio executives could understand. Which requires a lot of posturing, politicking, and melodrama.

come on, Favreau whined on every single possible website he could have.

Given he’s a tad less talented than Arthur Hiller… it’s a shame Marvel had to rehire him

Harley • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

Well, I agree that Favreau is a conventional asshole, which makes sense. He’s a fairly conventional director as well. This is sequel-itis — sure, give him a bump. But throw a stick out your window? You’ll hit five guys (or gals) who could direct the movie with the same results.

Armand • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

C’mon now. Is Favreau the real reason for the success of Ironman? Is he the only director capable to make Ironman 2, 3 or 10 a further success? What about the writers, the special effects team, the actots..etc. We’re giving too much credit to one man when the movie is dependant on many other factors

Look at Harry Potter series. WB got different directors to direct the 3rd and 4th series and they all did a marvelous job at it.

So to say only Favreau was the ultimate reason for the success of Ironman is the same as saying Bush was the reason why we go to war with Iraq. Some people forget about his cohorts, the congress etc..

Back to Ironman. Marvel owns the rights to the character and they can decide who they want to hire to direct the movie. Lets not get dwell on the idea that only 1 director can make a movie successful. Favreau just happened to hits the bulls-eye on Ironman. Wrong? Well go check his previous movies.

Oh! By the way Nikki, I read somewhere that Favreau commented about never wanting to do sequels. If this is true, then why is he agreeing on Ironman 2? Eem, money rules after all eh!

Judge • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

A lot of you commenters and Nikke Finke haven’t a clue. Marvel is so cheap that they treat their own staff like migrant workers. Favreau did use the internet to demonstrate to Marvel how fans would feel about cutting him loose. To say that Harry Potter was a success with different people at the helm is beside the point. Harry potter had well written books to directly write scripts from. Iron Man 2 will be lucky to get a tight script by the spring which is when they would have to start production to pull off a large effects film by the release date that Marvel committed to. And mixing comedy and reality into the genre is definitely Favreau. Try duplicating this with Michael Bay. Favreau did Marvel a favor by forcing their hand.

Dennis • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

Marvel can hire whoever they want.
They didn’t have a long term contract with him.
Nobody can claim a job.
Just because you directed the movie,doesn’t mean you and you only should direct every possible sequel they are willing to turn out.

Favereau should have kept his mouth shut and waited till Marvel came to him.
He should thank his lucky stars he got the job in the first place

Why Bother With Favreau Anyway? • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

I don’t know why there was even a “need” to bring back Favreau at all. As long as you have the cast back and a good script, there are actually several other directors better suited for this genre that would probably make a better looking movie anyway. Favreau was NOT the primary ingredient in Iron Man’s success. Not by a longshot. He is not a necessary ingredient in the franchise’s future, either.

Stanley • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

Jesus. You’d think that people who read this website would be better informed about goings-on in the business side of the industry, but you’re mostly just daft. However, I feel the validity of the “information” presented in this article is tenuous at best. Just like when it was reported that Norton was trying to ruin THE INCREDIBLE HULK, which ended up not being true in the slightest. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but is there some coercion with Marvel here?

Here’s the long and short of it: Favreau didn’t “just” direct this movie – he was involved from the ground up and, based on earlier drafts of the script that I’ve read (dating back to when New Line totally fucked it up), he was the major driving force in the development of ALL parts of the project. Was he the only component? Certainly not, and no one is suggesting that. Was he the main component in making the film what it was? Absolutely. That’s to take nothing away from Downey or anyone else involved. But it’s a fact, and if you’re not willing to buck up to that, you’re either an idiot or ignoring the truth.

The HARRY POTTER comparison is null and void, as that’s a studio-developed property and multi-faceted collaboration rather than something that one person with a clear vision came in and cemented. Not giving Favreau the shot to direct the sequel would have been an idiot’s mistake, worse than it would have been taking Raimi away from the Spidey sequel and just slightly less ridiculous than it would have been to take Jackson off LOTR.

Those of you shitting on Favreau completely disregard the amount of work he put into the project, and anyone suggesting that you could throw a rock and find someone more capable of conducting the train just shows what a clueless plebe they are.

bob-e • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

so Favreau is definitely not doing the Wonder Twins? bastard.

washington • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

Hmmm, Marvel rushing sequels. We all saw how well that turned out for X-Men 3, Spiderman 3, Fantastic Four 2. Ok, admittedly they made money, but I’d argue that each managed to dent each franchise a bit in the process.

Favs made a good movie that made a shitload of money for Marvel. It will stand the test of time as one of the better Marvel flicks. He has every right to be a little cocky (using the asshole world in this case is SO overdoing it).

I’m a big RDJ fan and thinks he owned Iron Man, but i don’t think anyone can take from Favreau the credit he deserve. He directed an almost flawless movie.
What i don’t understand is how can they have a good sequel on April 2010 if RDJ is starting to work on Sherlock Holmes this October. I really hope Marvel will return to their senses and push IM2 back to 2011.

Rob (ShutUpRob) • on Jul 9, 2008 4:37 pm

Dennis: obviously, you’re not in showbiz. Yes, a director has moral claim to a sequel until one or the other side decides to pass. And yes, the studios try to err on the side of retaining directors for sequels. Especially since Bryan Singer leaving the X-Franchise resulted in that catastrophic abomination of a third X-Movie, The Last Stand.

— Rob

PS: Granted Maisel is no day at the beach himself, but, seriously, could Favreau have been more of an asshole?